1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

Decolonising the curriculum

Discussion in 'Education news' started by physicsfanboy, Jun 12, 2020.

  1. ParakeetGreen

    ParakeetGreen New commenter

    Music is PRACTICALITY as well. For kids finding what they're attuned to. So for example the worldwide popularity of the Ukelele (from that Musical Imperialist Island Hawaii!) demonstrates this. Thus diversity is only a secondary vehicle, not the causative reason for expanding the music curriculum and seeing success. Our hearts beat like drums thus the drum is inevitably a simple and practical musical instrument that potentially accords and attunes with more people than not. I know I prefer a good drum to a lot of classical music! In fact making music for oneself is as important as listening to music eg Beethoven and they're likely very different requirements: The former simple instruments will more than suffice and in fact such gainful activity will more than overall reward than listening to Beethoven no matter how delightful such music can be or Sidney Bichet for Jazz if one prefers...

    Again in Science: 1) Body of Knowledge that guides us - yes 2) Means of Investigation of Phenomena and Self - more important than 1) to teach imho. Bit like the above music example. I gave the example of friction to a student by saying when you are moving on your bike and you put the breaks on then stop then touch your front wheel - did you ever do that and feel it was hot...

    Btw some on this thread I really appreciate your commentary and careful elaboration. Thanks.
     
    alex_teccy likes this.
  2. alex_teccy

    alex_teccy Lead commenter

    I was not aware of Lysenkoism until today, thank you.
     
  3. MsOnline

    MsOnline Occasional commenter

    'There’s no reason to suggest that scientists were personally motivated by imperialism.

    It is predicated on the fallacy that Imperialism was overwhelmingly negative.
    The opposite is true.' Alex Teccy

    :(

    This is why we'll fundamentally agree on so many issues if this is one of the basis of your opinions.

    Imperialism' a policy of extending a country's power and influence through colonization, use of military force, or other means.'

    To many, the other means and impact of colonialism mean oppression, abuse, murder, racism, displacement, greed... the list goes on.

    I don't expect you to agree but could you think of it from the side of those who've been on the receiving end of this treatment?
     
  4. SparkMaths

    SparkMaths Occasional commenter

    As opposed to having the former ruling classes in those countries which meant oppression, abuse, murder, racism, displacement and greed? Many people in the UK during those times were also subjected to those things.

    Was there anything unique about British rule which made any of the abuses by a ruling class worse (or better) than usual?

    I'm open to it being a net negative, I just think you need more than saying that taking over a country is inherently bad, when there's no context to what those places were like before.
     
  5. MsOnline

    MsOnline Occasional commenter

    The Transatlantic Trade in enslaving other people. Unique in magnitude, length, impact and economical advantages for the Empire.

    I personally think taking over a country is inherantly bad.
     
  6. SparkMaths

    SparkMaths Occasional commenter

    I agree! But what if you have a situation like in India where it had already been taken over by the Mughal Empire and if the British Empire didn't take over then another European power would be getting involved? Did British involvement actually change the amount of bad things happening? It may have but I think we need more information and context to judge, it's much more complicated than what's being presented.

    I think the Trans Atlantic slave trade is one of the worst things to happen in human history, but British people were buying slaves, not capturing them from areas they ruled. It wasn't unique either, the Romans come to mind.
     
  7. phlogiston

    phlogiston Star commenter

    I think we all agreed it was bad, but also not uniquely so. Finding pre 1850 societies without slaves is probably easier than finding ones with slaves.
     
  8. phlogiston

    phlogiston Star commenter

    Oops that will teach me to multi-task.
    I meant finding societies without slaves pre 1850 is probably harder than finding societies with slaves. Big enterprises, whether industrial, algricultural or architectural require cheap labour, this might be slaves, might be exploited workers.
    Post slavery, things were pretty bad. Robert Tressell's The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists paints a grim picture of life for low paid workers during the UK depression of the early 20th century. His argument was that if the workers had been slaves, then the owner might have invested more in keeping them, than the employers of that time rewarded their exploited workers. I note that as a view of that time, and am not sufficient of an economic historian to know how much this was true. I am aware that some slave owners saw them as throwaway resources.
    Many would be recruits to the British Army for 1914 were too undernourished to be fit to serve.

    As for now - I still read of slaves in the textile industry making me wary of very cheap clothes (but also more expensive ones). I still read of desperately poor people in many countries struggling with necessities of life. I also know that trade can help lift people out of poverty.
     
  9. Steph2002

    Steph2002 New commenter

     
  10. Steph2002

    Steph2002 New commenter

    My God what the hell are we all coming to I can’t stand this any more !I Who cares about colonies its history it matters okay history matters wasn’t that a big saying at one time? Where and when are they going to start talking about Stalin’s Russia ????my students didn’t even know about the extermination of billions of people there had no idea.
    All they knew was Nazis bad..We need a completely balanced view of history basically everything that ever happened needs to be known...Even if it cannot all obviously be taught
     
  11. Ellakits

    Ellakits Lead commenter

    Misogynistic aural assault.
     
  12. Skeoch

    Skeoch Star commenter

    I have clear memory of discussing the impact of colonial rule with some men who had been in the forefront of the freedom movement in one African country, one of whom had been a minister in the first independent government. They were unanimous that British rule had been honest, effective and beneficial, and that later governments after independence had been self-serving, corrupt and harmful to their people. They set food supply, health and honesty above issues like the franchise.
    No one now would deny that slavery is wrong, nor that the British Empire, once the decision of abolition was made (earlier than many countries), made great efforts to enforce abolition. The navy was running anti slavery patrols in the Atlantic from early in the 19th century, and was still patrolling the Red Sea in the 1930s with the same purpose.
     
    alex_teccy and SparkMaths like this.

Share This Page